Thank-you, Ryan.
We don't use triggers. Mostly because it makes RAID difficult. And it
used to be a serious performance hit I don't know how true that is today.
I am looking forward to using the new @IDX.IOTYPE because we do have a
couple pseudo-trigger index using an I-descriptor subroutine to update a
file.
There is an issue or 2 in the release notes about indexed subroutines
that do updates.
11.1.0UNV-4025
Prior to this release, updates performed within a UniVerse BASIC
subroutine called through an indexed I-type may have failed when the
index update was being done within a transaction. For example, if
the file containing the indexed I-type was updated within a BEGIN
TRANSACTION/END TRANSACTION block in a UniVerse BASIC program, any
updates done in the indexed subroutine could fail.
I haven't seen that corruption. I don't know when it was introduced.
They don't tell us that.
cds
On 9/25/2013 9:01 PM, Ladd, Ryan wrote:
Chuck,
Two other new parameters that may require changing are SHM_GNTBLS and SHM_GNPAGES. The "What you
need to know for Eleven-One" document mentions these, but in the segment that called "Shared Memory
Parameters that should not require changing". The key word in that statement is "should".
When we upgraded on AIX to 11.1.4 from 10.3.9 the defaults were used and we ran out of GCT entries fairly
early in the day.
I would also say that if you use dynamic files with i-type indices as well
as triggers, pay close attention to the patches. You may need to modify your
TXMEM parameter to avoid write errors for larger records.
I remember change to the FMT statement. I believe the "fix" was the addition of the
"FMT_TEXTMARK" configurable. We were lucky with that one and noticed the issue before
upgrading our production environment.
Ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rick Nuckolls
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 6:16 PM
To: 'U2 Users List'
Subject: Re: [U2] Recommended 11.1.point release to upgrade to.
Chuck,
I agree that they took a simple (but fine) route on the local scoping. What is funny is
that the interpretation of it seems to be that it allows the overriding of the production
version of subroutines rather than simply creation of a "safe" version of
gosub. It should work for both; I just never pictured it that way.
Be sure to read the install notes on 11, in particular, the "NUSERS" config item is
new & important. Fixtool finally seems to work well. I know that a lot of work has gone
into that over the previous couple of years.
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:53 PM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] Recommended 11.1.point release to upgrade to.
Thanks, Rick.
They're finally getting in your desired variable scoping into 11.2,
too. From what I read, I like how they did it.
My prejudice against being an early adopter of major releases kicks in &
makes me not want 11.2.0. 11.2.4 maybe. Also, if I wait until
November, my window closes.
The vast majority of the issues listed in the 11.1 release notes have to
do with stuff we don't use at all (DR, DARE, MQ, etc), or use so
minimally that complete regression testing is easy (XML, callHTTP, etc.)
There were several issues having to do with indexing. I think if I
validate the indexes after regression tests, that should suffice.
Issues that involve locking are trickier. It will require load testing
and lock contention.
I am not looking forward to that.
The only time in my whole career that I recall having any problem with
backward compatibility after a UV upgrade is also the only time I've
seen a day's worth of work for an entire company abandoned and the
previous night's backups restored. There was an undocumented change to
FMT was made that ended up truncating out data, if I recall. It's in
the U2-list archives. Some of the same people who suffered through that
are with me now.
cds
On 9/25/2013 12:53 AM, Rick Nuckolls wrote:
Chuck,
We currently have one machine running 11.1.12 with no real problems. 11.1.13
is basically a one, only-on-severe-load, bug fix, and even then, unlikely.
There is at least one thing that I am expecting in 11.2 that is worth waiting
for, assuming it shows up. I did not see it in the public beta. I think that
11.2 is supposed to be out around Nov 1.
-Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charles Stevenson
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:28 PM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: [U2] Recommended 11.1.point release to upgrade to.
We're finally going to upgrade from 10.2.10 to 11.1.[something].
But which point release?
We're on Win2003. (Linux next year. Baby steps.)
Release Date Issues
11.1.13 Sept 2013 3 brand new.
11.1.12 June 2013 38 rescinded
11.1.11 Mar 2013 30 Metadata Manager introduced.
11.1.10 Dec 2012 66
11.1.9 May2012 75
11.1.8 ? 2
11.1.7 Dec 2011 3
11.1.6 ? 4
11.1.5 Nov 2011 42
11.1.4 Aug 2011 17
11.1.3 Jun 2011 17
11.1.2 May 2011 29
11.1.1 Feb 2011 45
11.1.0 ? 23
I generally tend to not be an early adopter when the major release first
comes out unless it has a new functionality that I have a strong
business need for.
The later point releases tend to be bug fixes, so I am more prone to get
them sooner rather than wait.
In this case though, we have new functionality, Metadata Manager,
introduced at 11.1.11.
Are many users on 11.1.11? Happy?
If i understand correctly, 11.1.12 was pulled off the market because of
a bug that was fixed in 11.1.13, which just came out. So not much
experience in the wild with these 2.
Which one did / would you choose to upgrade to 11.1?
TIA
Chuck Stevenson
_
_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
